Halloween (2018) Poster

(I) (2018)

User Reviews

Review this title
1,058 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
8/10
True to the original classic Halloween finally a good horror slasher film they did it right
rambofan4life31 October 2018
I don't understand the hate for this film or why is it so bad? I went too see this movie In the movie theater last night with my eyes and my mind open, which I had blast watching the film. It is gory, it is bloody with real horror slasher effects. The filmmakers were true to basics and they did it something right. Michael Myers did not disappoint and he wasn't a joke like he was in some sequels. I love the gore the death kills, you see a woman been stabbed with kitchen knife trough her head awesome and disgusting. That was bloody gore fun.

We have a heroine Laurie Strode (Jamie Lee Curtis) who fight honorably with Michael. They finally did a right making a good decent horror slasher movie. If I had to pick top 3 best Halloween movies they would have been the original, this one the second favorite and part II from (1981) which was another true sequel to the original.

There is a lot of body counts, we see teeth's, good special effects. Good direction from David Gordon Green. It was produced from John Carpenter and Jamie Lee Curtis. I enjoy this film it is true to the original and ignores all the sequels. It is set 40 years and we see Laurie been a mother and messed up, but so what. The gory kills were great. The cast did well job done. The Music theme was based by John Carpenter, Cody Carpenter and Daniel Davies it was good score. Jamie Lee Curtis was excellent and she did her job right and well done. I like the cast and this movie, the story and some of the characters. It was also scary and the film freaked me out and almost every one in the theater.

This was the second Halloween movie I went too see in the movie theater. In 2002 I went with my friend to see Halloween Resurrection that movie was dog s**t but I had blast seeing it with the girls. Last night I had a rough night in the movie theater and people including old couple and teenage brats girls took my sit, some witch was accusing me something I didn't do, were extremely rude and mean too me but this movie was worth too see it in IMAX and did not disappoint.

This movie was MILES way better than Rob Zombie's Halloween I and II movies that I hate it so much. Even John Carpenter him self was disgusted with those 2 movies and how Rob Zombie lied about John Carpenter he wasn't supportive to his films and stone cold towards him, of course that wasn't true. John Carpenter is not mean. He made great classics so I respect him and Jamie Lee Curtis more than Rob Zombie. Was better than Halloween Resurrection, Return, Revenge and Curse of Michael Myers it was miles better too me because I understood the film, the story line and what they trying to do.

The problems with the film I had was the facts that they ignored H2 (1981) brother/sister story and they didn't mention Laurie's friends at all, they didn't mention the reasons why Michael attacked her and why was he stalking her. I know why some people hate this film I read some people's comment saying about Dr. Sartain (Haluk Bilginer) and the twist on the end and because they did not like Dr. Sartain character because he was no Loomis. There was no Donald Pleasence as Dr. Sam Loomis in the movie because sadly he past away 23 years ago R.I.P. and it wasn't dedicate to him. They did dedicated the film too Moustapha Akkad who was producer of this long franchise. I love the twist I think this is the last Halloween movie and they did it right I enjoy the film.

Happy Halloween everyone!
144 out of 189 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Not what I was expecting but still something pretty good
edo-7060625 October 2018
I really enjoyed the opening with the credit scene like the first one. A climax of kills leading us to the inevitable encounter between Michael and Laurie. Carpenter's touch on the score is amazing, as usual. Green pays tribute to the original with some scenes that look like "oh I remember that!". In an era of questionable remakes and sequels of 70/80s slashers, Green's Halloween defends itself.
19 out of 24 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Tonally inconsistent and spreads itself too thin.
recklesscow19 October 2018
Warning: Spoilers
For starters, I'm a huge "Halloween" buff, so I was anticipating this "recalibration" since it was announced.

Jamie Lee back in action, Carpenter on board as a producer and scorer--what could go wrong?

Unfortunately, a few things.

One, this new "Halloween" seems to be having an identity crisis. It's a somber psychoanalysis on the effects of severe trauma. It's a teenage relationship film. It's a babysitter-in-peril slasher film. It's an action-packed revenge movie. It's too many things, none of them consistent. One moment we're watching hand-held, soft-focus camerawork focusing on a crying Jamie Lee as she copes with her past trauma--a beautiful, poignant shot with diffused lighting that's very "indie." The next, we're transported back into a 1980s slasher film before taking a veer into an episode of "Dawson's Creek" with two teenagers at the school dance. Scenes and tones transition without much coherency, almost as if the director was trying to force several film genres into one movie to cover all possible audience bases. You want a thumping action flick with shootouts and fights? We gotcha covered. A classic slasher film complete with 80s synth score? We got ya there, too. For the kids, you want something to relate to, some high school problems? Come on in. Had the film chosen to stick to one or even two of these genres, I feel the tone would have benefitted from it massively.

Yes, Michael is back and deadly, the kills being more akin to Rob Zombie's entries in terms of explicit violence. When Michael is on-screen, the film works wonderfully. Unfortunately, this being a "Halloween" film and a slasher, he's in it far too seldom for my taste. In the original "Halloween", Michael is a presence in the film from the opening right towards the very end, barely going 5 minutes without an appearance of some sort--lurking around bushes, watching from street curbs, etc. In this "Halloween", there's an entire 20-minute segment with no Michael at all. What's more, entire narrative segments have either been left unscripted or edited out for running time, leaving some jarring transitions where some offscreen action is explained via dialogue. One of these is the critical bus crash that allows Michael to escape--the scene is never witnessed in the film, only the aftermath. The same can be said for the fate of one character, whose death we only see in hindsight.

There are also two completely out-of-left-field subplots that spring up and go absolutely nowhere. How they weren't written out is beyond me, as they promise much exposition in the coming scenes only to completely be abandoned or forgotten about in the next. One has to wonder if such "twists" were really necessary to get said character from point A to point B--certainly there are less outlandish ways, no?

But all's not lost. The film does provide several hair-raising moments of suspense, and, when it plays to its slasher root strengths, works. One can't help but lament how much better it would have been had these elements been the sole priorities throughout.

Jamie Lee is fantastic again as Laurie Strode, and the new cast members all hold their own. The cinematography, albeit ranging from tonally inconsistent indie shots to glossy big-production horror film, is all very good, as is the music.

There's fun to be had here, no doubt, but the overall product is a strange mishmash of ideas and genres, like putting multiple kids' breakfast cereals into one bowl.

The original "Halloween" sequel still reigns supreme.
300 out of 472 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Extremely, extremely overrated by overhyped fans. VERY disappointing.
jdamaso-5087118 October 2018
Warning: Spoilers
*Very minor spoilers*

I saw this at H40 last weekend. When I left the screening I couldn't help but feel as if there's been a lot of marketing and misdirection thrown out there about this film, because watching the trailers and then the film itself it becomes obvious that Halloween (2018) was heavily reworked and edited.

Aside from that, the script is laughably bad (wait until you meet one of the new doctors from Smith's Grove and Allyson's horribly written father, Toby), the character of The Shape has been reduced to a really dumb, careless random murderer behind a mask (goodbye stalking scenes), the pacing of the film feels entirely like an action movie and lacks the "slow burn" of the original, and some characters just disappear from the story and you never hear from them again. It is NOT at all the dark, brooding film suggested in trailer #2.

Only positives, for me: Andi Matichak is fantastic, as are many of the teen actors. The first 1/3 is actually very good. When Michael arrives in Haddonfield, however, the subpar writing and direction really begins to reveal itself.

Overall, it's so disappointingly bad. The positive reviews seem somewhat disingenuous, probably because of the #metoo subplot (which is nice, but doesn't in and of itself make a film "good") and less of a reflection of the actual quality of the movie overall. All of the TIFF viewers that raved about this should be ashamed, they clearly got caught up in being at the premiere and having the actors in their presence, so they overhyped the movie to the rest of us.

So, so disappointed. The original "Halloween II," somehow, is the far superior film.
313 out of 497 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
A surprise package.
Sleepin_Dragon2 November 2018
I half expected the usual, cheap thrills, jumpy moments, and liberties taken with the legacy of Michael Myers, but....

....a total and utter surprise, this was a quality film, one that felt as if it had a level of respect for its original, it respected its roots, but forgot all those that came between, perhaps no bad thing.

Michael Myers the man, he transformed years back into some kind of superhero villain, unable to die, able to die and come back life, here he's treated as just a man, very well done.

The writing is fantastic, I loved the story, and how it played out, if only previous films were this standard. The music was absolutely fantastic, I loved it, the best of the original.

Gripping, well acted, exciting, intriguing. Ranks second after the original. 8/10
16 out of 20 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
THE PERFECT SEQUEL TO THE PERFECT HORROR FILM.
mail-825449 September 2018
As a filmmaker, I never post reviews nor have ever involved myself with anything on IMDB. But I will say this. I saw the world premiere last night at TIFF... it was fantastic. Genre, horror and halloween fans will love it. Being a huge Halloween fan myself, I was immensely happy to see how well they respected the source material and the characters. Fantastic job to the entire team on this film. It deserves all the praise. Go see it as soon as it comes out. Myers is back. Deadly, brooding, and real. Jamie leads the drama to all new levels.
468 out of 779 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Massively overhyped, overpraised, and underwhelming
dzwilliams19 October 2018
Warning: Spoilers
I'll start by noting that the 1978 "Halloween" has long been my favorite horror movie, and beyond that, generally, one of my favorite movies of all time. I've followed the development, production, and marketing of this sequel very closely and have been rapt with anticipation to see it, given that the director, cast, and crew have long cooed about the project's return to the simplistic menace and terror of the original. Well, I'm not sure what happened to that vision, but it wasn't actualized. And I'm really perplexed as to why audiences and critics are universally lauding it as the sequel "Halloween" has deserved for the past 40 years. While I'll openly acknowledge that no sequel could probably do justice to John Carpenter's singular mastery, I dare say that "Halloween II" was more tonally consistent with the original (excepting its considerable flaws, including the addition of the bloodline motive and Michael's portrayal as a glacially paced, unkillable bogey), and if we're talking about awaiting a long-overdue Laurie-and-Michael reunion/showdown, I legitimately think "Halloween H20" may have surpassed this film in quality had Michael been outfitted with a less laughable and cringe-worthy mask.

This film's director, David Gordon Green, has sold himself as a lifelong admirer, lover, and devotee of John Carpenter's original, and while glimmers of that fanboydom shine through periodically, if not continually, they do so in the most ham-handed fashion imaginable (as when Laurie's thrown from a second-story balcony, only to disappear from view immediately thereafter, a la the conclusion of the original). I applaud and was nerdily delighted to see that the opening and closing credits were captured in the same orange font as the original's, but that fact is hardly worth praising when weighed against the sheer stupidity of the bombastic opening sequence (featuring the deplorable British podcasters producers) and the lackluster, anticlimactic conclusion.

A lot's been said and reported, too, of this film's significance in its depiction of a female protagonist dealing with the long-term effects of trauma and striving to reclaim her narrative. Fair enough, but that places upon Jamie Lee Curtis the onus of delivering a pretty bare, fierce, and no-holds-barred Laurie Strode performance. And does she? Well, if you've seen the trailers, you've seen the best of it. But JLC can hardly be blamed for the travesty that is hackneyed writing. Perhaps not every traumatized woman would resort to reclusion in a heavily militarized hermitage and restless rumination over and obsession with an event that occurred 40 years earlier. Laurie's struggles with PTSD are every bit the caricature that the ad campaigns suggest, with her booby-trapped home and arsenal of semi-automatic weapons. In point of fact, she feels more like Ellen Ripley or Sarah Connor than Laurie Strode, and whether or not that's a desirable transfiguration is, I guess, in the eye of the beholder.

But above all, I think this film's major transgressions are (1) that is isn't in ANY remote way scary, and (2) that it totally fails to capture any of the original film's essence of simplistic creepiness (which was, after all, the entire point and vision behind retconning out the sequel mythology that followed). Lest we forget that, in the original, Michael slit a chick's throat after choking her, stabbed a guy (once), and choked another chick with a telephone cord. Here, he brutally massacres victims in a manner that's totally on-brand for all of the stupid sequels that were so painstakingly left behind: he rips out teeth, decapitates, impales, and bludgeons, much like Rob Zombie's incarnation did. There's nothing simple, sophisticated, or high-brow about anything that's being served here. And while it may be a stretch to categorize any horror movie as "classy," Carpenter's original came damn close to that distinction. The "genre-defying" Green is fundamentally a humorist, and I don't think that he and his retinue, despite their admiration of and purported respect for the source material, were up to the task of producing a sequel worthy of the original (and when you forcibly scrap every intervening entry in the franchise, for better or worse, that's an expectation you set).
226 out of 375 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
A flawed but welcome return to form for the franchise, and for slashers in general.
lnvicta21 October 2018
After Resurrection and the Rob Zombie films, it's an understatement to say that Halloween (2018) was a pleasant surprise. Laurie Strode was given the T2 Sarah Connor treatment and is now a formidable badass, having waited forty years for Michael Myers to escape prison so that she can kill him. This is the showdown we've been clamoring for.

If there's one thing Halloween (2018) gets right, it's the protagonist. Laurie Strode is treated with respect here, unlike in other sequels (I'm looking at you, Resurrection). She's been training for forty years, preparing, praying for Michael to break out of prison so she can kill him. Her daughter had to learn how to fight at a very young age, and eventually Laurie was deemed unfit to be a parent. Because of this, they have a strained relationship, and it's believable. There's even a satisfying payoff at the end. Horror filmmakers take note: a little character development goes a long way.

There's also Laurie's granddaughter, and this is where the flaws start to creep in. The teenagers and their drama was the weakest aspect of the movie. Sadly, most of the second act is devoted to these characters that we really don't know or care about. There's Laurie's granddaughter, her boyfriend, the comic relief guy, her ditzy friend, and her friend's boyfriend. That's the extent of their characters. Naturally, they're only there as fodder for Michael (except the boyfriend who mysteriously disappears from the movie), but the fact is that we're wasting time watching these characters interact when there's a much more compelling story on the sidelines.

Comedy is used fairly appropriately in the film, the little boy being the clear standout. But there are a handful of farcical bits that are either ill-timed or simply not funny, or a combination of both. This prevents the movie from developing an overall atmosphere. This isn't so much a problem in the third act, thankfully, but the finale would've been more effective if a bleak atmosphere had been established earlier in the film. A few more wide shots of the streets of Haddonfield in the fall weather; more shots of Michael standing in the background eerily out of focus; limiting the comic relief to one, maybe two characters max; any of these could've been helped.

That's not to say that the direction is poor. Far from it. This is the closest the franchise has felt like a Carpenter movie since the original. Gordon Green does a good job of keeping Michael in the shadows - even unmasked, it's difficult to make out his face. You really get the sense that he is, purely and simply, evil. Background action is also prevalent and well done (as in, there's not a music sting whenever Michael comes into frame). Again, a breath of fresh air after the Zombie films which had the subtlety of a sledgehammer.

This is an excellent sequel to Halloween and a thoroughly enjoyable, well crafted slasher movie on its own. It's wonderful to see the Boogeyman on the big screen again, and now he has finally met his match. Is it a perfect movie? Absolutely not. But Halloween (2018) is something to be celebrated if only for one thing: it proves that slashers can still be scary.
89 out of 141 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
Oh, so many questions about this movie.......
MWNiese19 October 2018
Warning: Spoilers
I enjoyed Carpenter's soundtrack and seeing Nick Castle and Jamie L. Curtis in action, but I was left with some puzzling questions.... Really, I mean, a mental institution allowing a psychotic inmate to be yelled at by an investigative reporter to pick up his killing mask on the 40 year anniversary of the killings? The state of Illinois allows the original killing mask to be borrowed by a reporter? The father saying that he spilled peanut butter on his penis? Transporting a notorious serial killer in a bus with low level offenders? And how did those reporters just happen to run into Myers at that gas station? That black guy with the big cowboy hat? Low brow humor that doesn't work to fill in the holes? The new doctor Loomis wanting to see what it's like to kill people? Myers could have snapped Laurie's throat at least three times but kept playing with her? Laurie so over the top ridiculous she builds an underground bunker under her kitchen? Then she burns her compound to the ground? Was that a victory for her, to burn her house down? A total let down for me....... I didn't even think the Halloween background setting was all that strong either.... Another B entry into the Halloween franchise...
224 out of 374 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Great horror movie, great sequel!
Larsii9026 October 2018
Wow - I was really surprised by this one! The trailer was already great, and Halloween does not disappoint! 40(!) years later, and after so many genuinly great horror movies before it it still manages to scare and thrill me.

Seeing Jamie Lee back in such an iconic role in a sequel that's actually great is magical. This film proves that Laurie Strode is as important as Michael is for its success, and I loved every minute of it.

It had all the great stuff from the first Halloween, but also fit well into 2018 and its horror film standards. Good scares, it often kept me at the edge of my seat and I laughed at the right places.

Best horror film I have seen in a long time. It is coming from a true Halloween fan, but I recommend it to everyone who just wants to have a good time watching a horror flick!

I dont give it 10/10 simply because it did have a few clishé scenes that I think the writers should have been more creative with and some plot points that didn't really go anywhere.
15 out of 20 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
I couldn't wait for it to be over...
mark-doster19 October 2018
Warning: Spoilers
It blows my mind that I am saying this but this movie just is not good at ALL. It had no idea what style it was trying to be. It involved characters that weren't needed and were fleeting. It still acts as though Laurie is Michael's sister even though she isn't and I did not believe that Laurie could be that crazy after 40 years, still stuck on that one night. The characters were not interesting or likable. They snuck in comedy at wrong moments. The pacing was off. It would rev up, slow down, take a sharp left turn, then slow down again, rev up for a second. There was little to no suspense or build-up. It was as though they just hoped having the Myers character would make everyone happy and they did not care to make anything else enjoyable. They just did not know what they were going for with this one. I compare it to sitting in a room with 3 TVs that each have completely different programs on each and you're taking turns watching all 3 at once. That's how inconsistent this movie felt. I could not wait for it to be over...
224 out of 386 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Brilliant
antony-williams19622 November 2018
Such a great , must see horror - everything about it is just fantastic and I hope it receives many awards - give Jamie lee something for goodness sake . Great nods to the past too !
11 out of 14 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Finally the true seqeul!
bryanarredondo411 October 2018
I'll keep this brief to avoid spoilers for those who haven't seen it. This movie does everything right and includes almost everything a fan loved about the original. The atmosphere also feels like Halloween, also a good modern but vintage vibe. Michael and Laurie are also given justice in this film for being well made once again. Blumhouse did an amazing job with one of our most beloved characters and they need to start giving all our other characters the same treatment as this version of Michael Myers.
236 out of 413 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Suffering from a serious case of earlyseeitis
jjdausey19 October 2018
The movie geeks who saw this early have been overpraising this to the skies. What i saw was an adequate revival with Jamie Lee doing her best with a totally unbelievable, over the top survivalist version of Laurie Strode, sequences taken whole cloth from the original and the myriad sequels, and strange moments of comedy that belonged in another movie and created weird tone issues. I might be alone in this but H20 was a far superior Laurie vs Michael rematch.
228 out of 406 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
THE SEQUEL WE ALL NEEDED.
dmonroe-689204 November 2018
This film has everything a Halloween fan ever dreamed of for a sequel. If this isn't a 10 out of 10 for you, you're an idiot.
14 out of 19 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
Wanted to like it but...
TateJ3rd19 October 2018
Warning: Spoilers
Wasn't scary, don't think they even tried to make it scary as they showed damn near every "jump scare" in the trailers and tv commercials. There are a couple of moments that are supposed to be funny thrown in that made me sigh. This is a horror movie about a masked man going around killing, nothing should be funny here but that's just my take. It takes awhile to get going. I enjoyed the two reporters trying to get Michael to talk and following Laurie's relationship with her family and her struggles with PTS but it was like get to the point already after awhile.

People are very, very dumb in this. Like, "there is a bus crashed off on the side of the road and mental patients wondering the street!". "Let me leave my child in the car while I investigate". Or "I know we are hiding underneath a kitchen counter/trap door in the kitchen and Michael won't likely find us but let me make as much noise as possible with my crying to help him find us". Or "I am a lady in the ladies room using the bathroom but why is this strange man in a jump suit and steel boots in here"? "And why is he opening every stall door?" "When he gets to mine I'll just tell him it's occupied" "Wait he won't leave...now he's just standing here, OH MY GOD TEETH!" And the list goes on.

I had high expectations (I don't know why). Jamie Lee Curtis did a good job I thought. As for Michael, this is a nitpick but he's unmasked a little too much for my liking. They never fully show his face but you see him from behind and from the side and he's an old, balding, white male with white hair. I kept expecting him to turn around and it actually be Richard Dreyfuss. The movements weren't Michael like, he moved almost like a robot or like someone was controlling him with a PS4 controller or something.

I just wish the movie would have been a little better. Especially when Michael finally returns to Haddonfield. It should have really picked up there but unfortunately the movie went down with lame kills, unwanted comedy, and the movie actually being edited badly. There is a scene where Michael is struck with a cop car and it is shot so badly. I hate to nitpick on something like that but it was so bad and obvious. The ending was flat and it was clear that the directors didn't want to kill Michael off because they want to make another one. If this guy traumatized you that bad, why wouldn't you make sure he was dead for sure. Why catch him on fire (they never show Michael actually being on fire) instead of shooting him in the head? He was standing right there?

I like the Halloween movies and hoped this would set them on a new better path but it might be time to FINALLY just let these movies and the Michael character be because this wasn't it.
224 out of 401 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
A movie that doesn't understand horror, much less Halloween
doe-3349120 October 2018
Warning: Spoilers
Nearly every review of the new Halloween starts out by stating the problematic nature of the franchise. That's why the possibility of a new Halloween film with a major budget, nine years after the last abortive attempt to make one of these films, raised such hope.

For the last year, we've been inundated with the assurances that these creators are people who get what makes Halloween work. This would finally be the sequel that fans had been craving since, oh, 1981.

There's really no nice way to say this, so let me jump in feet first. Beyond being a movie that fundamentally doesn't comprehend what made the original Halloween such a great film, the 2018 version of Halloween is a movie with no understanding of what makes a great horror movie, either.

That isn't to say there isn't a great set-up. Forty years after the 1978 Haddonfield murders (referred to as "The Babysitter Murders," a nod to the film's original title), a Serial-like podcast team makes its way to the area to investigate the story and try to see both sides. The first mistake the journalists make is to show Michael Myers' mask his iconic mask. This scene is pretty chilling, as the entire yard of Smith's Grove Sanitarium rises up in chaos, dogs barking, insane men screaming, Myers just silent and not turning his back. Let's not let the logic of how two podcasters got such a crucial piece of evidence out of police custody or how any hospital in its right mind would allow this interview to happen this way get in the path of the movie.

The podcasters then make their way to the fortress home of Laurie Strode, who has spent the last forty years preparing for Michael's return. If this seems like 1998's Halloween H20: 20 Years Later twenty more years later, we should be so lucky. After a quick interview in which the British duo shows that they just don't get it, Laurie kicks them out.

Outside of Laurie, there isn't a single character that we get to know or care about. Her daughter is someone who has given up connecting with her. That's her one note. Her granddaughter is in a crappy relationship and wants to get to know her grandmother a little better. And that's it. Every single other person we meet - save for Dr. Sartain - is just fodder. Contrast this with the original, where we get to know Laurie, Lynda (P.J. Soles shows up so quickly here you don't even catch her, by the way) and Annie really intimately before the first hint of bloodshed. I defy you to tell me one character's motivation or reason for being beyond words on a page here. For a movie that aspires to be above and beyond the slashers of the 1980's, even the worst of those had a character you wanted to root for other than the final girl.

Meanwhile, Michael has started to kill people all over again. Allyson's friend Vicky is babysitting instead of attending the school dance and she gets slaughtered. The scene where Myers is hiding in the closest was so much better effect in the trailer. Here, the way its framed, it loses any narrative punch. That's when we get to the next flaw in this film: it has no idea how to be suspenseful. There is no moment where you get that heart pumping feeling where the killer is stalking his prey, where you feel compelled to yell out words of help to the hapless victim onscreen. We saw this movie in a totally sold out environment of people ready to shout, scream and shriek. You could have heard a pin drop during this movie.

Director David Gordon Green said that the first cut of the film was two hours and fifteen minutes long, with the fat of the film and entire scenes cut for pacing and length. That amazes me, as this 1 hour and 46-minute film felt like it lasted for 3 hours. There are whole characters introduced, made to feel like they'll have something to do and then discarded. You could honestly get rid of Laurie's granddaughter, friends, the high school dance, her walk home and still have the same basic story. The only reason she's in there is so that we have young babysitters for Myers' to kill. We learn nothing about her other than she's strong willed, smart and has horrible taste in men. There's no reason to root for her or hope that she survives. And even worse, her mother is presented as such a shrill that you almost want to see her pay for the way she has shut Laurie out of her life.

What makes the first two Halloween films work is the atmosphere - from the first frame, you realize that something inhuman is coming after Laurie Strode. The second film just amps up the pace and makes The Shape into an inhuman force that cannot be stopped. In this film, he's just there. At no point do you feel tension from him or worry for the people he has come to kill. Things just happen. It's sloppy, slap-dash and for all the insults lobbed at the other sequels in this franchise, much closer to parts 5 and 6 than I'm sure the filmmakers would like to admit.

This may be the first Halloween modern filmgoers see. And as such, there is no moment in it that points to what makes Michael Myers special. I can name several from the original, such as the moment where he watches Bob after he kills him or slowly rises up after we're sure Laurie has killed him. And the end, where his body is just suddenly gone, is the stuff of nightmares. Early in the new version, Vicky's boyfriend Dave echoes the voice of millennials, saying that Myers' five murders aren't such a big deal anymore in the grand scheme of things. I feel for anyone whose initial exposure to this franchise is with this film, one where Myers fails to do one remarkable thing or elicit one moment of fright.

I've seen plenty of reviews that state that this is the best sequel in the franchise and a return to greatness. I think that those reviews were written before anyone even saw the film, preordained so that the feel good story of the return of a much-maligned franchise could come true. I tried to remove myself from the hype, to attempt to be surprised and enjoy Halloween 2018 on its own merits, but it really has little to none.

The sound of Michael's breathing over the end credits signifies more than the fact that The Shape has survived. No, it means that in two years, we'll be lining up all over again, hoping that this time perhaps someone can get what seems to be such a simple idea right.
135 out of 238 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Bad Writing
georgebatton22 October 2018
Warning: Spoilers
The problem with modern movies isn't the actors, cinematography, special effects, lack of budget, or the directing. The biggest issue I see in movies today is lousy writing. Such was the case with Halloween 2018. The dialogue was a train-wreck, and the script was stilted and boring. The characters were stock, unlikable and uninteresting. I was hoping that Michael Myers would hurry up and kill them all off so the movie could end. What was the point of having the two British actors if they are going to be killed off at the beginning? They added nothing to the plot and didn't have anything to do with the rest of the movie. Were they trying to replicate the plot twist in Psycho or something? The original Halloween was a brilliant horror classic. Halloween 2018 was nothing but a bunch of lame jump-scares, gratuitous violence, lame attempts at creating shock value, and awkward situations that felt random, forced and out of place. I wasn't expecting much so I suppose there isn't justification for me to complain. I can't help but allude to the time when someone interviewed Matt Parker and Trey Stone about Star Wars The Force Awakens. They stated that it reminded them of the Happy Days cast reunion episode with a lot of "Oh, remember when this happened?" "Oh, remember when that happened?", "Oh, remember this character from the original?" moments. Halloween 2018 is the same kind of fan-baiting garbage.
102 out of 177 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
It really is one of the best sequels!
yowi70110 October 2018
I'm a big fan of the Halloween franchise and this movie made me fall in love with the franchise even more. I was worried it would be another "Resurrection" where it's nothing new and only reusing the same scenes from the original. But my god is this movie great! Recommended for any Halloween fan or horror movie fan overall, Michael Myers is back and ready to stalk his prey.
180 out of 326 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Disappointing.
bcreynolds519 October 2018
Warning: Spoilers
Honestly so overrated and disappointing. Jamie Lee Curtis had 40 years to prepare for this, and somehow didn't think to not stand right in front door made of glass? Or have camera on the inside of her house as well? Or not have mannequins all over the place that of course looked like Michael? I felt myself getting less and less scared as the movie went on because of how stupid her decisions were. Also.. Michael escapes the night before Halloween and brutally murders like four people that night, but the next night only a couple local cops are on duty to protect Laurie? And why was he moved on a bus with hardly any security at all! Anyways, just so many plot holes and stupid decision making. The violence was also SO over the top and which wasn't the case in the original and despite the fact that they never showed his face from the front I still felt like they showed too much of him. I did like the fun throwbacks to the original film and the hilarious kid her friend babysat, but overall it was just another horror movie where none of the police's actions/protocols make sense and the female lead is made to look stupid and weak, despite preparing her entire life for this moment.
115 out of 203 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Why the glowing reviews?
tkling3619 October 2018
Warning: Spoilers
It wasn't necessarily a bad movie. Some of the writing was good, the nods to previous movies was nice but in the end it was just there. It wasn't scary, it didn't live up to the hype and it left it open ended when no more sequels are needed. I would rather watch Halloween 4. This movie was a snooze fest overall. The ending was lame and didn't make me forget any of the other lame duck sequels. All around forgettable
151 out of 272 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Once more with feeling
TribalWho9 September 2018
Warning: Spoilers
Seen at TIFF. Almost entire cast was there, inc. the Shape.

Halloween returns for it's final chapter, and manages to deliver everything you'd expect from a Halloween sequel, and some things you won't see coming. The film opens with the documentary crew visiting Michael, a scene that's been covered quite extensively in the trailers. You'd expect things to go bad immediately but the film pulls back (not before the intro played, to Carpenter's wonderful score) to introduce its key players and gives them time to breath, setting up the status quo and making them more relatable.

With three generations of Strodes to choose from, there's certainly something for everyone to be able to relate to. Jamie Lee Curtis's Laurie has spent the last few decades getting ready to take Michael out, isolating herself and destroying all her relationships in the process. She has two failed marriages behind her and no relationship with her daughter. Only her granddaughter seems to pay any attention to her, as much as she can anyway, as she enters the movie in the throws of teenage romance, with all the angst and supporting characters such a romance requires. Throw in the Sherrif, Michael's doctor and the documentary crew in the mix, and the movie certainly does a great job of setting up a diverse buffet for Michael to slice and dice his way through. And that, he does. Boasting some truly memorable kills, Halloween does not hold back on the violence and gore, instead using it to build up dread throughout the movie. In fact, the whole film is an exercise in dread, slowly building up tension throughout its runtime and exploding into a glorious, bloody finale.

While the films comes close to going off the rails trying to keep all its moving parts together (there's an odd subplot that pops up halfway through and one that I did not see coming, but never really goes anywhere and is STOMPED out pretty quickly), it manages to hold it all together and deliver a fantastic (hopefully) final entry in franchise, with some fist-pumping moments sure to be memorialized in pop-cult history. Excellent performances by Jamie Lee Curtis and Judy Greer.

Some points to note: -There is a lot of Scream 4 in here. From self-aware teens to a toughened-up, table-turning protagonist. Not necessarily a bad thing. -I thought this was a sequel to H1 and H2, but early on they make a point of saying Michael Meyers has killed 5 people - which could not include H2's body count? -It's a pleasure to see Michael Meyers finally cement his position as the Boogeyman of Haddonfield, part of it done during a wonderful long-take.
141 out of 255 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Loved this movie
fadi_elias9331 October 2018
Great movie! Loved it so much. Finally a good Michael myres movies
16 out of 23 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Disappointing, Forgettable and Maybe A Little Full of Itself
super-joey20 October 2018
Warning: Spoilers
In 1978, John Carpenter unleashed a horror classic. The story continued a couple years later when he co-wrote/co-produced (and composed the music for) Halloween II. It was a great sequel that picked up where the first movie left off.

Ah, remember how that first movie ended? The camera cuts to various locations where the story had taken place as the breathing of Michael Myers takes over the soundtrack. What an ending! It seemed to say, "The shape is still out there." He's unstoppable. Right?

Well, not according to this new 2018 sequel which ignores Halloween II and claims to be the "true" sequel. Now we're told Michael was recaptured that same night before killing anyone else.

Wait. What? So the boogeyman was... recaptured? That sort of ruins the magic of that classic ending to the original movie. I don't buy that Michael got shot 6 times, plunged out of a 2nd story window, walked away, then got recaptured.

No. The original movie made it clear. The shape is out there. Stalking. Prowling. Murdering. It took the events of the 1981 sequel to bring him down. Shooting both his eyes out and setting him ablaze. In my mind, THAT is what happened that night.

But if we are to accept the events of Halloween II, Michael and Laurie Strode are not brother and sister, as that film revealed. I know, I know. John Carpenter has stated in interviews that he never really wanted to do the brother/sister thing. Okay. Whatever. But he still co-wrote/produced the movie that introduced that idea into canon. It seems odd to wipe it out 37 years later. At least Halloween: H20 had the decency to keep Halloween II in the canon so the brother/sister relationship remained.

Furthermore, the entire legacy of Dr. Loomis (who returned in 4 sequels to battle Michael) is wiped from canon! Reduced to only the one meeting in 1978 that, we're now told, ended with this unlikely "recapture" idea.

Okay, okay. I've said my bit about the frustrating, constantly changing canon of the Halloween films. But what about Halloween 2018? Is it at least a good movie?

Well, it had some very good moments. All the sequels have had good moments. I'm not sure that justifies wiping everything else out and claiming this as the "true sequel." It's not THAT good. It's not a better Part II than Halloween II (1981). In my opinion, it's not even a better sequel than "Return of Michael Myers." Yet it callously wipes them out and acts superior. It's not.

You get a few suspenseful, well directed scenes. You get some of the better "funny banter" in this franchise's history (which improves the scenes with the teenagers, whose dialog in past movies ranged from okay to poor). And you get maybe one or two good kills (and a bunch of forgettable ones).

That's about all the good I can say. I left feeling dissatisfied, despite really wanting to love the movie. I paid top price for the best possible screening, hoping it would turn out to be the masterpiece critics and "early screener" fans were claiming it to be. But having seen it, I wonder if a lot of fans aren't "Phantom Menacing." After all, Carpenter is involved again as one of several producers and one of three composers. They were going back to the original sours and ignoring the lousy Rob Zombie remake. Great!

As a result, many fans were proclaiming this "the best sequel" several months before it even came out!

So we're supposed to cum in our pants because Carpenter endorsed it. I wanted to cum! But I didn't. Other fans did but maybe after the novelty wears off, they'll realize it was a premature ejaculation. See if you still think it's a "bona fide classic" in ten years. Remember, MANY fans said the same about H20 when it came out. It was, "Finally, a real sequel!" Where are those fans now?

Finally, I just gotta say this: Those critics who are saying this movie "broke new ground" are clueless. It is NOT the first slasher movie to feature strong female leads with no man rescuing them. I can name SEVERAL classic slashers where the lone surviver was female. It's a common trope. The "final girl." So those saying, "Finally" and, "It's about time" are just ignorant of the genre.

Having said that, it was obvious that the filmmakers went out of their way to make sure there were NO strong male characters in this. Not one. Hell, one boy even dresses in drag while his girlfriend dresses as the man. I get it. Men suck. Women are strong. Boys don't need role models. Only women do. Fine. Thank you, Hollywood, for giving us this message for the 1,000th time. And thank you media/critics for ONCE AGAIN acting as if its groundbreaking.
79 out of 138 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
I don't like slashers but I loved this 9/10
alicepetit9 September 2018
Not a slasher fan but my we caught the world premiere at the film festival. And... wow, just great. "It does what it says on the tin" - only better. No spoilers - but scary, gory, engaging and surprisingly funny. Great acting. I'm not converted to be a slasher fan, but this gets my big thumbs up. Bravo.
191 out of 353 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed